Rocksteady is out, Warner Bros. Montreal is in to develop console, PC prequel.

After reviving the idea of the Batman video games with two titles that were bothcritical and commercial successes, you'd think Warner Bros. wouldn't want to rock the boat too much for its third Arkham game. That's apparently not the case, as the publisher announced that the next title in the series, Batman: Arkham Origins, will be developed by WB Games Montreal. That's the internal studio behind the recent "Armored Edition" update to Arkham City on the Wii U.

Details are still scant on the new title beyond its planned release on the PC, Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii U worldwide on October 25. However, today's announcement does confirm that the game will be a prequel to the existing Arkham games and "showcases a young and unrefined Batman as he faces a defining moment in his early career as a crime fighter that sets his path to becoming the Dark Knight." The game will also be featured in next month's Game Informer, whose back cover reveals that Deathstroke will be a major antagonist in the game.

"We are very aware of the fact that we are standing on the shoulders of giants. We are playing in the space of some of the most critically acclaimed games of all time," one WB Montreal developer says in Game Informer's cover reveal trailer.

Warner Bros. also announced the first portable companion game for the Arkham series, titled Batman Arkham Origins Blackgate. It will launch for the 3DS and Vita the same day as its console and PC cousin. That title, developed by Metal Gear Solid HD Collection developer Armature Studio, will be a "2.5-D Metroid-style exploration action game" according to Game Informer.

I thought Arkham Asylum was good but flawed, and Arkham City was brilliant and nearly flawless. But I'd rather see an Arkham City-style game where we play as Superman, Wonder Woman, or Green Arrow. Don't really need more Batman right now.

BTW, I'm pretty sure Rocksteady is out because they are working on something new and great. Not everyone wants to spend their career doing the same thing over and over again.

Oh right, screw they awesome people who made WB tons of cash and fame. NICE. I see this series going down hill from here on out. Bye bye awesome Batman games.

Agreed, Rocksteady was dominant in its presentation of Arkham Asylum and Arkham City, why would WB suddenly change, they can't foresee making more money with this change can they?

I'd say a lot depends on who does the writing, as a lot of what made the previous two games so great was the narrative and story. It leaves me with a sense of caution, but I'll wait and see. Sometimes different can still be better. I just hope the new crew worries more about making their own great game rather than just attempting to emulate Rockstead.

I wouldn't be surprised if Rocksteady wanted to do something different after two (decidedly great) Batman games, and either declined or held out for a price so high that WB decided it wasn't worth it. Best of luck to all; I'll be interested to see what Rocksteady do next, and I'll wait for the reviews on Origins.

Oh right, screw they awesome people who made WB tons of cash and fame. NICE. I see this series going down hill from here on out. Bye bye awesome Batman games.

Where did you get that from? Normally great teams don't want to do one sequel after another and instead switch over to new IP. Which is the time the second team comes in and milks the franchise with a couple of ok sequels.

Oh right, screw they awesome people who made WB tons of cash and fame. NICE. I see this series going down hill from here on out. Bye bye awesome Batman games.

Agreed, Rocksteady was dominant in its presentation of Arkham Asylum and Arkham City, why would WB suddenly change, they can't foresee making more money with this change can they?

The only reasoning that I can think is that WB wanted to do the game, but Rocksteady, for whatever reason, couldn't or wouldn't do it. I doubt that WB would jump to another studio as a first choice. They aren't stupid. They generally put out great games.

Deathstroke also seems a weird choice since he's now in current DC terms more of an anti-hero than a villain. He also has little prior contact with Batman himself prior to Infinity Crisis - he's more of a Teen Titans villain.

Oh right, screw they awesome people who made WB tons of cash and fame. NICE. I see this series going down hill from here on out. Bye bye awesome Batman games.

Think you might be overreacting.

I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that WB somehow must want to screw over their own >>subsidiary<<, Rocksteady.

I don't understand how you wouldn't conclude instead that Rocksteady must be developing their next great project while the sequel is relegated to a sister developer.

I do understand not being optimistic about about Origins, but still no reason to overreact. In other examples... KOTOR 2, BioShock2 or Fall Out New Vegas may not have been as great as KOTOR1, BioShock or Fall Out 3, but they were still some fine games despite the bugs. Handing a sequel to a sister developer doesn't always equate to 'horrible'.

Since this game is going to be released for the current generation of consoles there is still hope that Rocksteady is working in a Batman game targeted for the next generation wich could mean enough power and memory so we can have a complete Gotham City. *crossing fingers*

Deathstroke also seems a weird choice since he's now in current DC terms more of an anti-hero than a villain. He also has little prior contact with Batman himself prior to Infinity Crisis - he's more of a Teen Titans villain.

keep in mind we only have that picture of deathstroke, what role he plays is conjecture.

That's apparently not the case, as the publisher announced that the next title in the series, Batman: Arkham Origins, will be developed by WB Games Montreal. That's the internal studio behind the recent "Armored Edition" update to Arkham City on the Wii U.

Details are still scant on the new title beyond its planned release on the PC, Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii U worldwide on October 25.

So... Surely they aren't starting the development "today", right? 6 months isn't time to do anything like this worldwide.

I do understand not being optimistic about about Origins, but still no reason to overreact. In other examples... KOTOR 2, BioShock2 or Fall Out New Vegas may not have been as great as KOTOR1, BioShock or Fall Out 3, but they were still some fine games despite the bugs. Handing a sequel to a sister developer doesn't always equate to 'horrible'.

In point of fact, FO:NV was better than FO3 in almost all ways, and KOTOR2 was better than KOTOR1 in every way except for not being what one might call done.

Oddly I don't really have an opinion on Bioshock 2 vs 1. I definitely liked both games, but I can't definitively say one was better than the other.

Sucks for Rocksteady games, from 2009 Studio of the Year to getting dropped from the game series you reinvented successfully. Letting a studio created in 2010 with 300 employees take on a customized Unreal engine game...yah this could go badly.

Hopefully they are being rewarded with the resources for their success and working on new IP.

Everyone seems to have liked Arkham City, perhaps I should get with the times and give it a go; I did like Asylum very much.

I think the concept of Origins is awesome enough to give the studio a bit of latitude and wait to see what they come up with. It's going to be hard to completely muck up a game that's taking place in Gotham on Christmas Eve.

What an inflammatory byline. Really suggests there's some kind of bad blood between WB and Rocksteady while nothing in the article itself supports that suggestion. The speculation in this thread that Rocksteady might like to be more than just "The Batman Studio" is just as valid.

Deathstroke also seems a weird choice since he's now in current DC terms more of an anti-hero than a villain. He also has little prior contact with Batman himself prior to Infinity Crisis - he's more of a Teen Titans villain.

Hamil has said he's out as Joker. I don't want another actor playing him.

The rest of the Bat-villains have been well served by Rocksteady. So let's see someone new.

And finally, Deathstroke might be more anti-hero in comics now, but he wasn't always. And he's popular. So it makes sense to use him. Huzzah.

Everyone seems to have liked Arkham City, perhaps I should get with the times and give it a go; I did like Asylum very much.

I skipped Asylum and only grabbed City when I found it used for very, very cheap....holy crap, I was utterly blown away by it. Everyone had been saying how great AA/AC were for years and I still thought "meh, licensed superhero games are almost never any good". But Arkham City is literally one of the best games I've played this decade - probably within my top-5 all time favorite games.

I thought Arkham Asylum was good but flawed, and Arkham City was brilliant and nearly flawless. But I'd rather see an Arkham City-style game where we play as Superman, Wonder Woman, or Green Arrow.

That's exactly my opinion of the games, except flipped. So I don't mind seeing Rocksteady working on another AAA property while a new developer takes a crack at Batman.

I agree with you. I loved them both, but something about AA was a better game to me. Much creepier atmosphere, I liked how the Riddler trophies worked, the stuff to discover was done a little better, etc.

The actual game play of AC was better, and the combos were easier to pull off and the gliding was incredibly well implemented. But something about creeping along through the hallways of an insane asylum chasing Joker just worked better for me. To be honest, as much as I enjoyed AC, the story was almost nonsensical. But I still loved it.

Because they are beholden to stock holders. My bet is that Rocksteady realized that they are now famous and tried to re-negotiate their contract with WB for more cash. WB laughed and walked away.

WB are screwing themselves. FOOLS.

Rocksteady can't renegotiate their contract with WB and shop to another publisher. WB bought them in 2010 with a majority share. Which means that WB Interactive calls the shots. If they wanted them to develop another Batman game, it would have been their entire privilege.

There were easter eggs in Arkham Asylum that hinted at a possible development, with the plans for Arkham City. There wasn't anything like that in AC, apart from the planned DLC about Harley Quinn.

So, it's more than likely that Rocksteady presented WB a non-Batman-related project and that WB agreed. Remember that Rocksteady has access to the WB franchises and licenses. If they have a good idea about a game based on The Hobbit or Superman (even if it's DC property, it's still the next big franchise for Warner), there may be a few executives willing to listen to that...

I'm not concerned about the fact that a Wii U version is coming out, Arkham City Armored was excellent. Also not concerned about a new developer. A new developer is not a death sentence for a game franchise. Remember Metroid Prime?

I'm not concerned about the fact that a Wii U version is coming out, Arkham City Armored was excellent. Also not concerned about a new developer. A new developer is not a death sentence for a game franchise. Remember Metroid Prime?

Funny you mention that. The studio behind the Vita/3DS spin-off was founded by three of the creative leads behind Metroid Prime. They decided they didn't want to work on Nintendo IPs any more, preferring more creative freedom. So at first they were working on an FPS Mega Man that got cancelled, then they finally delivered their first game, the Vita port of the MGS HD port collection, before finally ending up on a handheld spin-off of a franchise handed off to a second-tier developer. Yikes.

Did no one notice the real news here is the 2D Metroidvania game with the combat and gadgets the Arkham series is known for?

And it's pretty obvious Rocksteady is likely working on something new and shiny for next-gen. Whatever they're working on, I'm gonna play. The Arkham games were simply stellar. A new studio can take over the template at this point. And those two games were so good that the third would still be a great game even if the quality takes small hit.

Kyle Orland / Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in Pittsburgh, PA.